Self-defence.
The permission of Ahasuerus appears to us singular almost to madness. Indeed, it could only have been such a character as we know Xerxes to have been that could have coolly contemplated plunging every province and every city of his empire into the horrors of civil war. However, it seemed better to him to grant permission to the Jews to arm and to defend themselves than to reverse formally the decree he bad already issued for their destruction. So first the despot commands the enemies to arm against the Jews, and then commands the Jews to arm themselves against their enemies.
I. SELF-DEFENCE IS, WITHIN LIMITS, A NATURAL RIGHT. What is the alternative? In the case of an individual it may be a violent death; in the case of a nation it may be either subjection or annihilation. Thus, civilisation may be replaced by barbarism, and Christianity by idolatry or fetishism.
II. SELF-DEFENCE IS A LEGAL RIGHT. Here the Jews were expressly directed to defend and deliver themselves. And there are cases where the law justifies the putting forth of force in defence of life and property, and he who smites his assailant is held guiltless. Great defenders of their country are enshrined in a nation's memory.
III. SELF-DEFENCE IS SOMETIMES PUT FORWARD AS A HYPOCRITICAL PRETENCE. It has often happened that an aggressive, ambitious nation has endeavoured to persuade itself, to impose upon its neighbours, to believe that its action is merely defensive in mustering armaments, enlisting warriors, and making war. All the while designs of empire, of spoliation, of subjugation may be before the nation's mind.
IV. SELF-DEFENCE IS A SPIRITUAL LAW. If we are anxious to defend ourselves, our property, our families from violence and theft, how anxious should we be to secure ourselves against the assaults of the devil. Every Church should be a confederation for common protection against the inroads of error and of sin.